Hollins University Hollins University

Hollins Digital Commons Hollins Digital Commons

Ann B. Hopkins Papers Manuscript Collections

5-18-1990

Bucking the System Bucking the System

Aaron Epstein

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.hollins.edu/hopkins-papers

Part of the Law Commons

F

¦ 111 I'm U.j _ ¦

SHOULD IT PIATTER? There were complaints t at nn Hopkins beer, wearing no makeup and carrying a briefcase, not a purse,behave too much like a man cursi g, smoking, drin ing The court sai that was no excuse to deny her a partnership.

By AARON EPSTEINHerald Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON Ann B. Hopkins, a reluctant role

model for women, strode i to a restaurant forlunch Tuesday, plunked down a worn leatherbriefcase, dropped Ait a' »chair and ordered a

Beck s beer. , ' She wore horn-rim glasses and no lipsti k in fact, no

cosmetics of any kind a d by the time hejr second Beck sarrived, she demonstrated gh acquai tance fdth many of thewords that family newspapers decline to print.'

It has been seven yearssince she was on the verge otreaching her career goal alucrative partnersh p in thegiant accounting firm of PriceWaterhouse only to havesome of her male bossesderail her ambition for behav¬ing too much like a man.

Now, in a precedent-set¬ting case that went all theway to the Supreme Court,U.S. District Judge GerhardGesell on Monday awardedher the partnership that shecovets and that Price Water-house still does not want herto have. That had never hap¬pened before in a sex discrim¬ination suit.

Partnership . . . is thelogical remedy, Gesellwrote, because Hopkins waslikely to have been made apartner if not for unlawful dis¬crimination.

Ann Paterra, a spokes¬woman for Price Waterhouse,said: We are in the processof studying the court s deci¬sion in order to determine anappropriate response.”

While at Price Waterhouse’s Washington office as a man¬agement consultant, Hopkins brought in more business thanany of the other 87 candidates for partnership in 1983, all ofwhom were men. But she irritated staff members, includingsome women. They regarded her as harsh, impatient, exces¬sively demanding.

There were complaints that she behaved too much like a

man cursing, smoking, drinking beer at lunch, wearing nomakeup and carr ing a briefcase instead of a purse.

One Price Waterhouse partner said she needed a “courseat charm school. Another described her as “either bitchy or abitch.

A partner who supported her candidacy advised her to“walk more femininely, talk more femininely, dress more femi¬ninely. He suggested that she ear makeup and jewelry andget her wav brown hair styled. .

That advice, she recalled at lunch Tuesday, was “sopatently absurd that I didn’t remember it. It was a message

that didn’t register.I ve got no problems

with the way I walk, no prob¬lems with the way I talk. Idon t wear makeup becauseone, I’m allergic to it, andtwo, I wear trifocals and Ican’t see to put it on with mylasses and I c n t see to put

it on without my glasses. She said she hasn’t used

a handbag for 20 years andlearned to curse from heryears as an Army brat.Instead of charm school, shetook a course in karate.

As for her taste for beer,I tried Campari and soda

once. I didn’t like it. In short, with a pair of

small exceptions, Hopkins hasrefused to compromise withthe attitudes of sex stereo¬typing at Price Waterhousethat were found to have con¬tributed to its refusal to ele¬vate her to a partnership inthe spring of 1983.

I did have my earspierced. That was becausemy daughter turned .12 andsaid she wanted to have her

ears pierced. I said it was in bad taste. ... I remember growingup and the impression I had was that having your ears piercedwas one step ahead of prostitution, she said.

Later, after consultation with a female friend, theydecided our upbringing was out of touch with the times and it

PLEASE SEE BIAS, SE

¦iiiia

I®1:K ntills

¦1 HhUMI

i

¦ I10 T/hiskV't fenimtie $12dit jh * -I2011 D3S62. So sh-3 FSllfc o 00

n ; iiiiglit not s ooei y o

| . a C oumtiiig for stereoty es at work,co rt tells partner-to Ib© a d aer Ibosses

workplace echt Sqhafran) a lawyer for the NationalOrganization for Women s Legal Defense Fund, saidwhen told of Gesell’s ruling: It s fabulous. It meanswomen will have to be evaluated and valued by employ¬ers on the basis of their work product, not in terms,ofsex stereotypes.

I e been cast as a role model, but I ve never partic¬ularly thought of myself as one, said Hopkins, who at45 is divorced, lives with her three children and is pai £92,500 a year as a senior budget and policy review offi¬cer at the World Bank. ' ,

At Price Waterhouse, the average partner makes£173,000 a year and gets emberships m lunch andountry clubs and a reserved parking space. 0 900

partners in 90 Price Waterhouse offices in the United' St tes only 27 are women.

A year ago, a fragmented Supreme Court ruled m theHopkins case that where an employer takes action

ainst a woman for both legitimate and discriminatory

reasons, the employer has the burden of justifying thedecision. At the same time, the justices reduced thelevel of proof required to refute claims of sex bias.

The high court returned the case to Gesell, whoawarded Hopkins a partnership even though Price Waterhouse plainly doesn’t want her.

He ordered the firm not to retaliate against her, not-in it is so large that extreme workplace hostility anddisruption is unlikely,and “concerns about freedom ofassociation have little force.

However, he chided Hopkins for failing to do every¬thing she could to obtain a high-paying managementconsulting job after quitting Price Waterhouse in 1984,and reduced her request for back pay from $478,000 toabout $350,000.

Although there still are some [expletives] at PriceWaterhouse who would not welcome her back, Hop¬kins said, she wants the partnership because I’ve spentnearly seven years in litigation to get this opportunity.

But the case may not be overPrice Waterhouse law¬yers re studyin Gesell s decision to determinewhether to appeal.

Well, Hopkins remarked, as my son [Gilbert, 12]said to me, Mom, how many more times do we have towin this case? ., , , ,

She looked at her watch, rose, said she ha anappointment and tossed a $20 bill onto the table.Informed that she was being treated to lunch, Hopkinssaid, It s a matter of principle, and hurried out.